| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Apache Camel OAuth component.
This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.11.0 before 4.18.5, from 4.19.0 before 4.22.1.
The authorization code callback did not carry a state parameter binding it to the authorization request that started the flow, and the callback did not verify one. An authorization code obtained in any browser could therefore be redeemed at the callback and associated with whichever session presented it, which is login cross-site request forgery: a victim can be silently signed in as an identity the attacker controls, so that actions the victim then performs, and data they then submit, land in the attacker's account. The same unvalidated callback handling also allowed the post-authentication redirect target to be influenced, giving an open redirect from a trusted origin. The state check runs before the authorization code is redeemed, so these paths are reachable without any interaction with the identity provider.
Upgrade to Apache Camel 4.23.0, which fixes the issue. Users on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.18.5. Users on the 4.22.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.22.1. The authorization request now issues a state value bound to the session, and the callback rejects a request whose state is absent or does not match, stopping the route with a 400 response. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, terminate the authorization code flow in a component that performs its own state binding rather than relying on the Camel callback. Note that after upgrading, a deployment behind a proxy that drops or rewrites the callback query string will begin to see 400 responses, because the state parameter must survive the round trip. |
| Gitify before 7.10.0 contains a login cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows remote attackers to bind a victim's client to their account because performGitHubWebOAuth() omits OAuth state validation. Attackers can get a gitify://oauth?code= link with their own authorization code opened during a victim's pending login, causing Gitify to display attacker-controlled notifications as the victim's own. |
| Traccar 5.7 through 6.16.0 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to log victims into attacker-controlled accounts because the OpenID Connect callback never validates the OAuth state parameter. Attackers can induce a victim's browser to load /api/session/openid/callback with their own authorization code, causing data the victim enters, such as registered devices, to land in the attacker's account. |
| OpenRefine through 3.10.1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the get-rows command that allows remote attackers to execute Jython facet expressions. Attackers can lure a user to a malicious page issuing a cross-origin GET with a crafted engine parameter, executing operating system commands as the OpenRefine user. |
| Python Social Auth is a social authentication/registration mechanism. Prior to 5.0.2, the LINE backend exchanges an authorization code without validating the returned OAuth state. An attacker can begin authorization for an attacker-controlled LINE account and induce a victim to visit the resulting callback URL, causing the application to log the victim into the attacker's account. When account linking is enabled, the same missing validation can link the attacker's LINE identity to the victim's existing account and create a persistent unauthorized login path. Only applications with the LINE backend enabled are affected. This issue is fixed in version 5.0.2. |
| XXL-JOB 3.5.0-SNAPSHOT and earlier contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the user management controller (JobUserController). The endpoints /user/insert, /user/update, and /user/delete lack CSRF protection and do not restrict HTTP method. |
| Cross-Site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in AuthTake Technology Inc. Authtake allows Encryption Brute Forcing.
This issue affects authtake: from v1.3 before v1.4. |
| The Salon Booking System WordPress plugin before 10.31.9 does not correctly verify the authenticity of REST API requests and discards WordPress core's nonce check for cookie-authenticated sessions across the whole REST API, allowing unauthenticated attackers who trick a logged-in administrator into clicking a crafted link to forge requests in that administrator's browser, up to creating a new administrator account. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in aThemeArt aThemeArt Theme Helper athemeart-theme-helper allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects aThemeArt Theme Helper: from n/a through 1.0.8. |
| The Innovs HR WordPress plugin before 1.0.3.7.1 does not have CSRF checks in some places, which could allow attackers to make logged in users perform unwanted actions via CSRF attacks such as adding them as employees. |
| Several administrative actions do not sufficiently validate whether a request was intentionally initiated by the authenticated user. In particular, the DBUpdateLogCleanUp action can be triggered through a GET request without validating a ChallengeToken. An unauthenticated remote attacker can therefore cause the browser of an authenticated administrator to execute the cleanup action by embedding a crafted request in a malicious web page. Successful exploitation can delete existing DBUpdate log entries. This may reduce the availability of diagnostic and historical information used for troubleshooting and auditing. The impact is limited to DBUpdate log entries that exist at the time the forged request is processed.
Additional administrative endpoints were identified that do not validate a ChallengeToken. Some of these endpoints can trigger administrative actions such as deploying or synchronizing already existing configuration. They do not allow an attacker to introduce arbitrary new configuration through the CSRF request itself.
Export and read-only endpoints were also identified without ChallengeToken validation. While these endpoints may be triggered through a forged cross-site request, the response content remains subject to the browser's same-origin restrictions and is not automatically exposed to the attacker. Therefore, no direct confidentiality impact has been demonstrated for these endpoints.
This issue affects OTRS:
* 7.0.X
* 8.0.X
* 2023.X
* 2024.X
* 2025.X
* 2026.X before 2026.7.X
Please note that ((OTRS)) Community Edition 6.x and before are vulnerable. Products based on the ((OTRS)) Community Edition also very likely to be affected |
| An authenticated administrator can be induced to delete administrative Import/Export templates through a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attack. The OTRS AdminImportExport::TemplateDelete action does not validate the request's ChallengeToken, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to craft a malicious request that is executed with the privileges of an active administrator session.
This issue affects OTRS:
* 7.0.X
* 8.0.X
* 2023.X
* 2024.X
* 2025.X
* 2026.X before 2026.7.X
Please note that ((OTRS)) Community Edition 6.x and before are vulnerable. Products based on the ((OTRS)) Community Edition also very likely to be affected |
| FasterXML jackson-databind 2.x before 2.9.7 might allow remote attackers to conduct server-side request forgery (SSRF) attacks by leveraging failure to block the axis2-jaxws class from polymorphic deserialization. |
| A vulnerability was identified in yangzongzhuan RuoYi 4.8.3. The affected element is an unknown function. Such manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack can be executed remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. |
| Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure, Information tampering, Launch of phishing attacks, and Protection mechanism bypass. |
| Flower before 2.2.0 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability because Tornado xsrf_cookies is disabled and the OAuth session cookie lacks SameSite. Attackers can lure authenticated users to malicious pages that POST to /api/worker/shutdown, /api/worker/pool/restart, or /api/task/revoke to shut down Celery workers, resize pools, and revoke tasks. |
| A cross-site request forgery vulnerability was discovered in the login functionality (both standard and SAML) due to missing validation of the anti-CSRF token. An attacker with a valid account can trick a victim into unknowingly authenticating with the attacker's credentials. Any operation performed by the victim in this state is attributed to the attacker's account, compromising the integrity of the audit trail. |
| The (1) Manager and (2) Host Manager applications in Apache Tomcat 7.x before 7.0.68, 8.x before 8.0.31, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M2 establish sessions and send CSRF tokens for arbitrary new requests, which allows remote attackers to bypass a CSRF protection mechanism by using a token. |
| Joomla Extension - svenbluege.de - Cross-site request forgery of list tasks of the backend in Event Gallery extension < 6.6.0 - Eight tasks which the buttons of the back-end lists call did not check the form token: setting the default payment method, shipping method, image type set, order status and watermark; putting an event into the shop or taking it out; choosing the main image of an event and whether an image is shown only as the main image; and sorting the images of an event. A prepared page on another web site could trigger them in the name of a logged in administrator and change those settings and flags. Nothing can be deleted or read this way; orders are not affected. |
| Joomla Extension - svenbluege.de - Cross-site scripting and open redirect on the share mini page in Event Gallery extension < 6.6.0 - The page a shared image link opens (the share mini page of the front end) can link the article the image was shared from when the option "Share article links" is on. It took the address of the article from the shared link and printed it into the page without checking or escaping it; with the link type "Image Page with Redirect" it followed the address at once. A prepared link could therefore run a script in the page, in the session of the visitor who opened it, or send the visitor to another web site. Nothing on the server is changed or read by the server. |
